← Home ← Back to /lgbt/

Thread 40681171

125 posts 16 images /lgbt/
Anonymous No.40681171 >>40681203 >>40681284 >>40681384 >>40681727 >>40681910 >>40682222 >>40685492
She's back
Anonymous No.40681190 >>40681300 >>40685478
How has she been personally harmed by gays being allowed to marry?
Anonymous No.40681203 >>40681221 >>40681236 >>40681241 >>40682608
>>40681171 (OP)
mot sure if hot take: gay marriage has no standing in the constitution, no text that could be relevant to it, so it absolutely should be overturned and left to local states until there is a federal law passed recognizing it.
Anonymous No.40681206 >>40681222
i never understood homophobia
Anonymous No.40681221 >>40681243
>>40681203
https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/14th-amendment
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Anonymous No.40681222 >>40683098
>>40681206
bisexual women want to force bisexual men to BREED instead of letting them enjoy the love of other men
so they make up endless scare stories about how men who date other men
rape kids
can't be monogamous
get diseases
are the product of molestation
etc.
you have to understand WHO is doing it, to get why
Anonymous No.40681236 >>40681264 >>40681268 >>40681469 >>40682818
>>40681203
>until there is a federal law passed recognizing it
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Respect_for_Marriage_Act
Anonymous No.40681237
Based
Anonymous No.40681241 >>40681267 >>40681342 >>40681370 >>40683537
>>40681203
Oh stop it, you scamp. We all know you just posted this to shift the Overton window.

If you think that somehow whittling away the expansive view of the 14th amendment used to justify national legal gay marriage will benefit you, then I hope you also dont like having Miranda rights either
Anonymous No.40681243 >>40681264 >>40682818
>>40681221
where is the gay marriage law that states can violate tho
Anonymous No.40681264
>>40681243
see
>>40681236
Anonymous No.40681267
>>40681241
If you haven't noticed phobes are perfectly fine with voting for policies that will fuck them up as long as LGBTs suffer more.
Anonymous No.40681268
>>40681236
Oh nice I stand corrected then, thank you anon
Anonymous No.40681284 >>40682679 >>40683551
>>40681171 (OP)
we can not tolerate faith in public society any longer
Anonymous No.40681300 >>40681337
>>40681190
yes. religious freedom is being allowed as a legal argument to refuse anything someone doesnt agree with.
its wild. in some places medical staff can refuse to treat lgbt people lol.
Anonymous No.40681304 >>40681349 >>40681441 >>40682818
Gay marriage should be up to the states, I don't see why such a position is controversial. Forcing majority ultraconservative states and people in them to comply with your demands only makes those people more hostile to you.
Anonymous No.40681337 >>40682174 >>40683570
>>40681300
>medical staff can refuse to treat lgbt people
wwjd
Anonymous No.40681342 >>40681424 >>40681557
>>40681241
>I hope you also dont like having Miranda rights either
so about that
Anonymous No.40681349 >>40681392
>>40681304
gay marriage should be mandatory
outlaw heterosexuality
children should be raised communally
Anonymous No.40681370 >>40681395 >>40681584 >>40682849 >>40683663
>>40681241
I mean objectively the Obergefell decision is fucking nonsense.
Privacy rights has nothing to do with the right to marry. Absolutely tortured logic.
Anonymous No.40681384 >>40681415 >>40681796 >>40683622
>>40681171 (OP)
I have never met a monogamous married gay couple but the modern institution of marriage is a christcuck racket so I don't care.
Anonymous No.40681392 >>40681411
>>40681349
>i want society to collapse into pedophilic frenzy
Die freak.
Anonymous No.40681395 >>40681428
>>40681370
>I mean objectively the Obergefell decision is fucking nonsense.
we live in a christian fascist country
people having the good sense to try to protect gays from bullying is very sensible
Anonymous No.40681411
>>40681392
he's right.
Anonymous No.40681415 >>40681565
>>40681384
do you understand the benefits that are conferred to a married couple? a few important ones cone to mind, tax benefits are one and more importantly the right to be with your partner during medical emergencies. did you know that when people were dying of aids, some patients families would prohibit their partners from visiting them on their deathbed?
Anonymous No.40681424
>>40681342
Unironically cops got lazier as a response to desegregation and civil rights
Anonymous No.40681428 >>40681455 >>40681487 >>40682820
>>40681395
There's no constitutional right not to be bullied. Heck, the US makes doxes of MAPs public so vigilantes can find and kill them.

The Obergefell decision was unconstitutional and doesn't follow from any reading of the 14th that would stand up. Don't be too surprised if it gets repealed because when you make a ruling based on feels not logic all it takes for a reversal is someone with different feels coming to power.
Anonymous No.40681441
>>40681304
>durr let's just have a patchwork of civil rights laws in a country people move around in constantly
No.
Anonymous No.40681455 >>40681492
>>40681428
"constitutional right"
I'd rather live in a harmonious society than worry about textual autism designed to reinforce social hierarchies
you don't care if gay people are miserable, why should your opinion matter at all
Anonymous No.40681469 >>40681490 >>40681498
>>40681236
So what'd be the point of repealing Obergefell then?
Anonymous No.40681487
>>40681428
It's really not so outlandish when you see that the Obgerfell decision is building off the 2013 Windsor v US decision which employed a lot of the same logic used in Obgerfell. Nevermind that as of 2022 recognition of same sex marriages is federal law, though I wouldn't be surprised if this admin produces an constitutional pretzel from repealing Obgerfell
Anonymous No.40681490
>>40681469
I feel like theoretically states could stop issuing marriage licenses to gays if they overturned it, but states would still have to recognize out-of-state issued marriage licenses for gays (hilariously, basically the current situation in Israel).
Also, a huge symbolic victory the whole point of conservatism is trying to prevent any form of communal recognition of homosexuality in a positive way. There are NO organized religions with any sort of popularity that actively promote homosexuality as part of their tenets.
Anonymous No.40681492 >>40681515 >>40681521 >>40681528 >>40681646
>>40681455
All new rights take something away from someone else. If gays have more rights, homophobes and Christians have fewer rights. The only thing getting in the way of repealing gay rights under a Christian administration would be a constitutional justification for why they should remain.
You're admitting that Obergefell was a blunt exercise of power over your enemies, but all you're doing is justifying their actions for when they'll roll it back just as bluntly. Why? Because fuck you that's why.
Anonymous No.40681498 >>40681547
>>40681469
Because then it's not "the law of the land" and Republicans can repeal it (they control the government).
But we all know that it will get the abortion treatment from SCOTUS
Anonymous No.40681515 >>40681523
>>40681492
You can still be a homophobic christian and even still argue that from a religious standpoint God *only* recognizes marriage between a man and a woman and gays won't get a reward in heaven yada yada. Heck you can even say it from the pulpit.
Anonymous No.40681521 >>40681561
>>40681492
>All new rights take something away from someone else.
Are there a limited number of marriages in this country and every gay marriage means a straight marriage can't be done?
Anonymous No.40681523 >>40681654
>>40681515
You can say that, but you're still forced by the law to recognize anal fag marriage. That was Kim Davis' whole deal. She didn't want to recognize anal fag marriage and she got fired.
Anonymous No.40681528
>>40681492
>christians have fewer rights
oh no, that sucks
Anonymous No.40681547 >>40681560
>>40681498
Also it's much easier for the GOP to pass a nationwide gay marriage ban than an abortion ban. Trump will go all the way.
Anonymous No.40681557 >>40681581 >>40683679
>>40681342
Black bagging and then coercing a confession from the nearest black man doesn't count as effective policing
Anonymous No.40681560
>>40681547
A part of me feels that conservatives have to make their animus towards gays more apparent for gays to truly win hard-to-defeat legal and social protections against bullying by religious retards.
Anonymous No.40681561 >>40681592
>>40681521
Even a single gay marriage takes rights away from Christians. If two men are legally married Christians can be forced to treat them as such even though it goes against their own beliefs.
Anonymous No.40681565
>>40681415
Yes, that doesn't make it any less of a racket. Is checking a box on your tax form the "sanctity of marriage" that Obama granted gay couples? Get real.
Anonymous No.40681581 >>40681595
>>40681557
I mean statistically it probably does
Anonymous No.40681584 >>40681627
>>40681370
I guess you just really hate that the government is forced to recognize the equality of all citizens to be treated equitably

Just say that instead, that's all. The argumentation against obergefel is just as nonsensical, it's an excuse to have a de facto imposition of religious beliefs on all citizens, and could therefore be interpreted as an establishment of a state religion
Anonymous No.40681592
>>40681561
>takes rights away from Christians
BASED
idea: let's take all rights away from Christians
if you wanna believe in magic, can't stop you, but the government has no business endorsing your hateful bullshit
Anonymous No.40681595 >>40681635
>>40681581
Come on do better than that please

Not even gonna drop /pol/'s favorite slur over it?
Anonymous No.40681627 >>40681683 >>40683694
>>40681584
That's your own interpretation of what equitable means. Christians would say all men have an equal right to marry a woman under God.

>it's an excuse to have a de facto imposition of religious beliefs on all citizens
Marriage has been between a man and a woman for time fucking immemorial. That's its whole purpose. Family formation. You don't need to be a Christian to see that
Anonymous No.40681635
>>40681595
Jew?
Anonymous No.40681646 >>40681652
>>40681492
>All new rights take something away from someone else

Legality is not thermodynamics. One person's right to not be burned at the stake for being gay does not mean that somehow Christians have lost anything. It means that fellow God fearing Christians who aren't gay won't be falsely accused and burned at the stake either, because burning people at the stake for desiring the "wrong" person is barbaric and goes against what we want in a peaceful society
Anonymous No.40681652 >>40681736
>>40681646
>One person's right to not be burned at the stake for being gay does not mean that somehow Christians have lost anything.
Well of course they have, they've lost the right to burn people at the stake for being gay.
Rights are zero sum.
Anonymous No.40681654 >>40681671 >>40681715
>>40681523
Then Kim David should go live a lifestyle that does not involve interaction with the secular world, where we do many things that are prohibited for observant Christians beyond recognizing same sex marriage. It's just hiding bigotry behind belief if this is the one bone she has to pick with secular society.
Anonymous No.40681671
>>40681654
trve
Anonymous No.40681683
>>40681627
Idk as far as the federal government (and state for that matter) is concerned is that marriage is a legal term for the purposes of determining property rights and taxation. Nothing is lost for Christians if gays can get married as far as the government is concerned. You can have your beliefs and do whatever you feel is necessary and right in the eyes of God. But when it comes to the government-recognized institution of marriage none of that has any bearing on the legal questions.

You know this, but you appeal to tradition in an attempt to distract people from what you're really trying to argue.
Anonymous No.40681715 >>40681890
>>40681654
>It's just hiding bigotry behind belief
THIS
Anonymous No.40681727
>>40681171 (OP)
You get what you deserve.
Anonymous No.40681736 >>40681760
>>40681652
>rights are zero sum

They aren't, objectively for the reason I just stated. But to you, they have to be, because otherwise what you're arguing in favor for (a Christianized federal government) makes no sense.

You know this of course which is why you will regurgitate exactly what you just said again at me, you disingenuous poster-kun
Anonymous No.40681745 >>40681760
Finally faggots will suffer alongside us. The LGBT can be one big family of freaks again.
Anonymous No.40681760 >>40681834 >>40682125
>>40681736
Your stated reason for disagreeing is "because I don't like some rights". That's not a valid reason.

>>40681745
Thanks to trannies getting Trump elected we can finally turn the clock back on homosexuality too. A fitting punishment for gays who tolerated trannies taking their movement over
Anonymous No.40681796 >>40681807
>>40681384
>I have never met a monogamous married gay couple
it is FUCKING so rare to come across anyone whos looking for monogamy, online or offline doesnt matter. everyone is an absolute sex addict retard. 99.9999999999% of gays literally dont have a single neuron inside their skull

theres only any support for this at all because of progressive retards that read anti white bullshit
Anonymous No.40681807 >>40681872
>>40681796
>people I meet on apps for people looking for sex, are looking for sex
Anonymous No.40681834 >>40681846
>>40681760
That's an excellent attempt at downplaying and deflection. However if you take a look at what I actually said, and not your false quote which you attribute to me, is
>because burning people at the stake for desiring the "wrong" person is barbaric and goes against what we want in a peaceful society
I can promise you that a majority of people would agree with the statement that burning people alive for being gay goes against what they want in a peaceful society. Under essentially any poll other than what you see on fox news/newsmax/oann, a plurality of people are totally fine with gay marriage. It's just you that wants the right to be as barbaric as you want to whoever you want for whatever reason you want.
Anonymous No.40681846 >>40681882 >>40681936
>>40681834
Public opinion is irrelevant. If I have a right to do X, then other people lose the right to stop me from doing X. The basic logical structure of a right is zero sum.
Anonymous No.40681872 >>40681881
>>40681807
theres no fucking difference between online vs offline AT ALL. there is literally NONE. it is exactly the same.

where does your dumbass even live that you get marriage proposals IRL?
it is LITERALLY the same lowly bullshit. you only ever get catcalling, sexvitations endless fucking bullshit, without the recourse to block those people. it is many times worse if you have to see them every day
Anonymous No.40681881
>>40681872
all you're doing now is humblebragging about being hot
Anonymous No.40681882 >>40681964
>>40681846
>Public opinion is irrelevant. If I have a right to do X, then other people lose the right to stop me from doing X. The basic logical structure of a right is zero sum.

Oh I see the confusion

You don't mean you want the right to do something, you want the justification to do something. You want the justification in legal terms to harm whoever you want. Unfortunately you don't live in an ancap fantasy land and instead live in a pluraliatic society. Well, for as long as that will last. I hope you enjoy the just deserts you will reap from instituting the prerogative state.
Anonymous No.40681890 >>40681915
>>40681715
we need to get these people to admit that what's driving them is hatred
Anonymous No.40681910 >>40681971
>>40681171 (OP)
gigalava take but civil unions have existed for decades and are equal to marriage and the whole "the church must accept and marry gays" thing is just salty christcucks that turned out gay upset that their desert book fairy tale won't let them buttfuck each other without going to south korea in the afterlife
Anonymous No.40681915 >>40682022
>>40681890
I mean they admit it its more that
a) they have numbers
b) they are physically stronger
c) they believe might makes right
they don't believe in government anyways (insofar as justice is a balance of competing motives)
Anonymous No.40681936 >>40681964
>>40681846
>other people to stop me
"Other people" are not enforcers or arbiters of the law, which is exclusively the domain of the state and government. This is pure nonsense. "Other people" never had the right to prevent anyone to get married, and so have lost no rights.
Anonymous No.40681964 >>40682026 >>40682041 >>40682074
>>40681882
>You want the justification in legal terms to harm whoever you want.
That's your subjective definition of harm. Christians can say they are harmed by the law forcing them to recognize anal fag marriage.

>>40681936
Marriage has currency because everyone is forced to recognize it or go to jail, like Kim Davis was.
Anonymous No.40681971 >>40682170
>>40681910
Another attempt to shift the Overton window. Civil unions aren't provided the same legal recognition as marriage under the law
Anonymous No.40682022 >>40682035
>>40681915
they don't admit it outside 4chan. we need to stop enabling these people to claim morality, confront them everytime about how you know they're just hateful people. they don't get to wear a mask of civility anymore.
Anonymous No.40682026
>>40681964
I'm pretty sure lighting someone else on fire is harming them, objectively, anon

You just want an excuse to cause pain and suffering on other people and are using Christ's name to justify it. You will not be recognized by Jesus at the gates of heaven. You can euphemize about it if you want but that's the truth.

But legally the things you're saying have no basis in formal law. So you can go pout about it and sermonize about it, which actually IS legal (for now). Hope your desire for authoritarianism in Christian garb doesn't interfere with that somehow in the future
Anonymous No.40682035 >>40682175
>>40682022
they will just rant about gays spreading disease, being pedos, molesting kids, etc.
until they fear physical violence, they don't care about logic
Anonymous No.40682041 >>40682085 >>40682343
>>40681964
Then Kim Davis should not have taken a secular governmental job wherein not complying with a court order finds one in contempt of that court, as she was. Her actions were akin to a banker who only charges interest to non-christians and then cries discrimination when fired, after being explicitly told by the legal authority she resides under that her actions were discriminatory. Ms. Davis was still perfectly entitled to view any same sex marriage, or even, any courthouse marriage not officiated by a member of her faith, as not a real marriage in the eyes of God, but she does not have the right to demand others adopt the same view.
Anonymous No.40682074
>>40681964
>because everyone is forced to recognize it or go to jail, like Kim Davis was.

No, Kim Davis was forced to approve a marriage certificate, which is a legally binding document, as a part of her routine duties as a clerk at the county office. She is free to go home and scream to everyone she knows about how it's not a real marriage and that those fags will burn in hell, and that the state is a fascist hellhole for forcing her to sign off on it. SHE didn't have to recognize anything. But as an acting clerk of the state, under state laws, she was required to do so, and was reprimanded accordingly (fired, not jailed. She was suing for wrongful termination on 1st amendment grounds, which was thrown out by the courts)
Anonymous No.40682085 >>40682343
>>40682041
Actually I'll just really hammer this home, not only does she not have the right for others to adopt that same view, she doesn't have the right to impede others who do not share her view, the same way one would have been held in contempt of court after a court order explicitly told them to issue marriage licenses to interracial couples.
Anonymous No.40682125 >>40682143
>>40681760
>fitting punishment for gays who tolerated trannies taking their movement over
nobody ever liked you guys either, you've been objectively worse for optics. disgusting pride parades, drag story hour, gay choir singing "we're coming for your children". I still stand with my gay bros though, I'm not letting dumb shit like that divide us because we're stronger together.
Anonymous No.40682143
>>40682125

>gays blame drag queen story hour on trannies
>trannies blame drag queen story hour on gays
Anonymous No.40682170 >>40682178 >>40682266 >>40682300 >>40684818
>>40681971
>Another attempt to shift the Overton window
The overton window doesn't matter anymore. The overton window is soft power. Hard power is trumping soft power the world over. We had our fun in the sun, the evil men with guns and control of the food supply run the show now, just like they always have. Have you not noticed ICE black bagging brown people in broad daylight with no pushback despite the mass protests and universal disgust at their actions? It's almost like the will of people never mattered and we all just pretended it did for a few decades while shit was chill.
Emily of 4chan !vOczjEBNSI No.40682174
>>40681337
Definitely not that.
That cunt LOVED to heal.
Anonymous No.40682175
>>40682035
they can rant all they want, they're dehumanizing the group they hate just like the nazis did to the jews.
Anonymous No.40682178 >>40682199
>>40682170
>It's almost like the will of people never mattered
this is a very ironic thing to say in a thread about gay marriage rights in the US
Anonymous No.40682199 >>40682232
>>40682178
Are you hinting at it being something that nobody ever wanted but was forced through anyway? Or that it was decided by about a bakers dozen worth of people that are unelected supreme court members despite it effecting how millions of people were now going to have to live their lives?
Anonymous No.40682222 >>40682233
>>40681171 (OP)
trans and black people caused this to happen
and yet lesbians and gays get punished
Anonymous No.40682232 >>40683014
>>40682199
Anal fag marriage was forced through the courts by wealthy new york jews who wanted to attend their gay kids weddings.

Not a democratic decision at all.
Anonymous No.40682233
>>40682222
What constructive thinking. I'm sure it will get you somewhere.
Anonymous No.40682266 >>40682641 >>40682665
>>40682170
>It's almost like the will of people never mattered and we all just pretended it did for a few decades while shit was chill

Yes that is indeed how the law works. It is impossible for a legal system to always function exactly as it is intended. But part of what makes the legal system work is a shard understanding that the belief in that system helps to ensure the system functions as well as it possibly can.

Conservatives in this country for the past decade or so have done everything in their power to undermine the belief that the system is there to mutually support the people. What we are seeing now, from the arguments of people ITT to ICE blackbagging anyone brown, is the natural progression of that undermining. If the system does not protect everyone equally, then why bother attempting to do so in the first place? That is why for them this MUST be a zero sum game. The objective was always to get to the point where laws are only enforced against their perceived enemies, it's how America used to work prior to the Due Process Revolution. Once things like the civil rights act were passed and legal decisions like Miranda were canonized, we made great strides go be more legally sound. And that, I would argue, is a big part of why America excelled from the 1960s and 1970s into winning the cold war. America simply made the better argument about Universal equality than Soviet communism did, and was accepted more broadly in the world. But now we are choosing to roll all that back under the pretext of a zero sum rights game. And it will crush our nation, one day being seen as the turning point where the American empire began to collapse.
Anonymous No.40682300
>>40682170
my schizo take is that they will force the civil war that takes out christians and gun ownership.
Anonymous No.40682343
>>40682041
>>40682085
Anonymous No.40682608 >>40682832 >>40685537
>>40681203
Disallowing you to marry someone because you're male and not female, or the other way around, is the government discriminating against you based on your sex which is unconstitutional.
Anonymous No.40682641 >>40682763
>>40682266
>part of what makes the legal system work is a shard understanding that the belief in that system helps to ensure the system functions as well as it possibly can
Why should we believe in it when it either A, doesn't function as it should, or B, functions in a way that is against the good of the people it controls? The less people a system helps, the less people should believe in it.
Anonymous No.40682665 >>40682763
>>40682266
>muh soviets bad, merrica gud
America disbanded the soviet union by force against the russian people's democracy (which the soviet union had plenty of despite the Stalin years), ending the most progressive and free society there was at the time, even including for queers and women and any other liberal show dog.
Anonymous No.40682679 >>40682714
>>40681284
Anonymous No.40682714
>>40682679
I truly despise the slippery slope argument BUT even the benevolent or compassionate and generally more pro-social forms of faith seen in many older and less institutionalized religions definitionally empower the handwaving of of reason and evidence in personal and public decisionmaking that inevitably is exploited by authoritarians and those who seek to impose artificial hierarchy to maintain that authority at every level of society
Anonymous No.40682763 >>40682902
>>40682641
Because A) it was functioning mostly fine until Trump came along and B) it did, again mostly until Trump came along. There's only one party which has been consistently interested in undermining the civil rights act and other relevant legislation. The only people who can make an argument of being harmed are people who want to light other people on fire because someone else in a position of power gave a subjective interpretation if a translation of a book written a couple thousand years ago. However as I have said at least 3 times now, the right to visit as much harm as you want on another person is not covered under the shared rights of a pluralistic society. If you want a system where the laws are subjective to you I suggest moving to another country where it's more about who your friends in the system are than the actual legality of a thing, like Russia or China

>>40682665
And I mourn for the Russian people that have lost all that was gained. But I don't think going from a 1 on the 1-10 scale of human rights to a 2 or 3 was "the most progressive and free society there was at the time". It's more just a shame that Russians gained some measure of (classical) liberal rights only to immediately vote in a government which explicitly wishes to undo the (classically) liberalization of the world.
Anonymous No.40682818
>>40681236
>>40681243
The Respect for Marriage act will compel states to recognize any then-current same sex marriages, and recognize future same sex marriages from states where it is legal to conduct. Basically if Obergefell were overturned, various Red states SS marriage bans would kick in, but RCRA would force those states to still recognize other state's already conducted SS marriages.
>>40681304
So, Mr. "up to the states" guy, I'm sure you don't mind your driver's license, hunting and fishing licenses, and conceal carry licenses to be freely ignored by blue states? Allowing rights to expire just because you cross a state line is idiotic.
Anonymous No.40682820
>>40681428
>MAP
Demoralization post. Ignore.
Anonymous No.40682832 >>40682885 >>40682916
>>40682608
if that was true then it would be unconstitutional to have separate male and female toilets
that would clearly be insane so it's not the correct reading
Anonymous No.40682849 >>40682862
>>40681370
> Obergefell nonsense
> Privacy rights
Bro, you didn't even read the wikipedia before you typed this dumb shit. Obergefell was decided on 14th Amendment Due Process and Equal protection, not Privacy. Fail.
Anonymous No.40682862 >>40682960
>>40682849
It's "an equal right to express their identity" which is absolute nonsense.
Anonymous No.40682885
>>40682832
>Clearly insane
Anonymous No.40682902
>>40682763
>it was functioning mostly fine until Trump came along
holy lol, nepobaby hands typed this post
Anonymous No.40682916
>>40682832
>then it would be unconstitutional to have separate male and female toilets
For the government to mandate it? Yes.
>that would clearly be insane
Normalcy will look insane to insane people. In my country people use whatever toilet they want and there are no problems.
Anonymous No.40682960 >>40683036
>>40682862
No dumbdumb, its an equal right if two adult heteros can get a marriage license, then two adult homos can get a marriage license. Not even about identity. Two straight men can legally marry one another and still be in every sense straight and yet same-sex married. The point is they wouldn't want to other than some kind of tax, benefit or immigration fraud.
Anonymous No.40683014
>>40682232
> Not a democratic decision at all.
Nah it was a democratic majority decision 5-4, hahahaha.
Anonymous No.40683036 >>40683066
>>40682960
that's an autistic reading of "equality" that nobody ever intended when drawing up the legal system
nobody's demanding forced desegregation of male and female toilets so this is just a misreading of the law to ram gays in
Anonymous No.40683066
>>40683036
Wrong again! The US constitution explicitly states in the Full Faith and Credit clause in Art. IV the various States must recognize the public acts of other States. Once the first State started granting same sex marriage licenses, this logic compelled the other 49 State's to recognize them, and it just took until 2015 Obergefell for the SCOTUS to say so.
Anonymous No.40683098
>>40681222
All of those things are true though. I've dated men exclusively for more than 20 years. All of it is true. I have so many Goddamn stories. I wouldn't even know where to start. My firsthand experiences are literally one of the reasons I broke away from the left wing.
Anonymous No.40683537
>>40681241
You don't get it. The expansive view of the 14th Amendment is exactly what I'm opposed to. All this penumbra shit has got to go, it's nothing but the worst kind of judicial activism every time. I'm in favor of gay marriage but Obergefell is bad law and should be overturned, gay marriage must be either turned over to the states or an amendment must be passed in due order in accordance with the process laid down for so doing.
Anonymous No.40683551 >>40683612 >>40683689
>>40681284
>we can not tolerate [thing] in public society any longer
>t. Puny Minority
Anonymous No.40683570
>>40681337
What would juggalos do? Probably make that honking noise and the thing where they run lying down so they spin in a circle.
Anonymous No.40683612
>>40683551
except that
>[thing]
is in this case a toxic rejection of reality, evidence, and the ability to reason or think critically in favor of whatever your chosen authority (god, your pastor, your president, or your own fears and biases) tells you to believe
Anonymous No.40683622 >>40683682
>>40681384
>I have never met a monogamous married gay couple
Same, this is really the strongest argument against gay marriage. Second strongest is the fact that lesbiaks are monog but keep divorcing all the fucing time
Anonymous No.40683663
>>40681370
To be frank all common law decisions are nonsense. Civil law is the only way to go. However since Obergefell's decision benefits the US public, I don't care.
Anonymous No.40683679
>>40681557
It counts as effective policing.
Anonymous No.40683682 >>40683749
>>40683622
Brainwashed christian-brained take. Marriage is and always was just a way to set presumptions for inheritance and paternity, it never forced your spouse to be faithful.
Anonymous No.40683689
>>40683551
t. rapidly shrinking demogaphic
Anonymous No.40683694
>>40681627
>Marriage has been between a man and a woman for time fucking immemorial. That's its whole purpose. Family formation. You don't need to be a Christian to see that
N-n-no you don't understand, Buddhists have recognized gay marriage for three thousand years!!!!
(They stopped in the 1970s due to colonial oppression from Christianity)
Anonymous No.40683749
>>40683682
I think that USSR-style suppression of Abrahamic faiths would benefit America at this point. They've all gotten a little too full of themselves.
Anonymous No.40684818
>>40682170
>and universal disgust
That you think this is the entire reason you are losing.
Anonymous No.40685478
>>40681190
I want to make a joke here, but honestly no one. The fuck is the big deal. Seems like it's just Idpol bullshit the media pulls out whenever they need to do something shifty so the proles are distracted.
)*Kassandra of Ellaphae !wetBJHdekA No.40685492
>>40681171 (OP)
i knew this would happen when roe was overturned
Anonymous No.40685537
>>40682608
The government already does discrimination based on sex wdym? In the army women are allowed to have long hair by putting it on a bun while men are forced to have ugly buzz cuts